Of course it is. My niece (S) is pregnant, and also has a three year old, F. S takes F with her on an exercise walk in the park, but it is extremely difficult to keep her 2 metres away from others, so she doesn't do it every day. She gets tired, too (her pregnancy is difficult), and feels like she shouldn't be sitting down to rest in the park, and anyway, F wouldn't happily sit still if she did.
They moved about 18 months ago to a house with a garden, and she can't believe how lucky she is to have it, so that F can at least run about in there and get some fresh air. If they had stayed in the flat they lived in before, she would have been cooped up indoors. They are looking forward to picnics in the summer, too, which would be impossible to do without a garden. I can't imagine how she must be feeling about the birth, never mind the logistics of keeping a 3 year old occupied as it is - with no outside space it would be unthinkable.
I don't know about the testing thing either, apart from the logistics of getting people back to work (and making profits for shareholders etc) being complicated further. Obviously if someone is tested positive they can't go back yet, so it might suit the government for us not to know. TC's assessment has a depressing ring of truth too, but unless they are hoping that a lot of people will be positive and asymptomatic that will all come out in the wash sooner or later.
Are they really expecting to have a vaccine soon? I read in the Guardian that there could potentially be one earlier than 18 months, but it wouldn't have been tested properly, so are people really going to want to have it, particularly if they are in a high-risk group? Without one, aren't all the precautions we are taking just delaying the inevitable? We can't all stay indoors for 18 months, can we? Or is that the reality for all but really essential workers?